The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed against an award under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court held that the petitioner's objections under Section 5-A were raised belatedly and hence could not be entertained, noting that relevant decisions regarding land exclusion were taken prior to the award.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.14316 of 2010 Date of decision: 12.8.2010
Surat Singh
…..Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana and others
……Respondents
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih
Present: Mr.J.S.Thind, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral)
By filing this writ petition, the petitioner prays that award No.8, dated 25.6.2004, passed by respondent No.5 be quashed.
It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that before issuance of declaration under Section 6, objections of the petitioner, filed under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) were not decided.
Keeping in view facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that the petitioner has raised above objection at a belated stage and as such, cannot be entertained. In the present case, notification under Section 4 of the Act, to acquire a vast tract of land, including land of the petitioner, was issued in the year 2002. The petitioner filed objections in the month of May 2002, which may have been rejected. Thereafter, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued and ultimately, award was passed on 25.6.2004. The petitioner accepted the compensation and
2
Civil Writ Petition No.14316 of 2010
thereafter moved an application under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of compensation, which is still pending. It is grievance of the petitioner that land of others was released from acquisition, whereas that relief was declined to him. We have gone through the document dated 30.4.2010 (P23), which clearly indicates that whatever land was left out from acquisition, same was done before passing of the award. No case is made out for interference at this belated stage.
Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 12.08.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash an award under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act when objections under Section 5-A were raised at a belated stage.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief when the decision to exclude certain land from acquisition was taken before the award was passed.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Surat Singh
State of Haryana
Jasbir Singh
Augustine George Masih
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
